Duterte ICC Probe: Hearings Begin for Drug War Crimes

MANILA – The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) confirmation of charges hearing for former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte commenced today, February 23, 2026, marking a pivotal moment in the pursuit of accountability for the thousands of deaths that occurred during his administration’s “war on drugs.” The four-day hearing will assess whether sufficient evidence exists to proceed to a full trial on charges of crimes against humanity.

The ICC Prosecutor has laid out charges relating to 49 incidents of murder and attempted murder linked to the anti-narcotics campaign. The scale of victimization during the period under investigation is believed to be significantly larger than the specific incidents currently charged, according to the Prosecutor’s office.

Notably, Duterte is not present at the hearings, having successfully petitioned the court to waive his right to attend. The proceedings began with the Pre-Trial Chamber I reading the charges against him. Following this, opening statements were delivered by the ICC Prosecutor, the common legal representatives of the victims (CLRVs) and Duterte’s defense team. The Prosecutor will now present evidence and arguments supporting the case.

The ICC’s investigation focuses on the period between July 1, 2016, and March 17, 2019, when Duterte was president. The “war on drugs,” launched shortly after he took office, resulted in the deaths of an estimated thousands of individuals, many of whom were alleged drug users and small-time dealers. Critics have consistently accused the government of orchestrating extrajudicial killings and failing to uphold due process.

The potential outcomes following the confirmation of charges hearing are threefold. The Pre-Trial Chamber could decline to confirm the charges, though the Prosecution retains the right to submit a subsequent request based on additional evidence. Alternatively, the Chamber could adjourn the hearing to request further investigation, additional evidence, or amendments to the charges. Finally, the Chamber could confirm the charges, at which point the Presidency of the Court would constitute a Trial Chamber to oversee the next phase of the proceedings.

The hearings are scheduled to continue on February 24, February 26, and February 27.

The case has drawn international attention and sparked debate regarding the ICC’s jurisdiction and its role in addressing alleged human rights violations. Duterte has previously dismissed the ICC’s investigation, claiming the court has no jurisdiction over the Philippines and asserting that the allegations are politically motivated. He has described the claims of a policy of extrajudicial killings as “an outrageous lie.”

Families of victims have expressed a mix of emotions, ranging from hope for justice to frustration over the lengthy legal process. Sarah Celiz, whose two sons were killed in 2017, stated, “He should face everything he did to us and to the families of the [other] victims.”

While Duterte has refused to participate in the ICC proceedings, the hearings represent a significant step towards potentially holding him accountable for alleged crimes committed during his time in office. The confirmation of charges hearing is a critical juncture, determining whether the case will proceed to a full trial and potentially result in a landmark verdict in the realm of international criminal justice.

The case also highlights the complex relationship between national sovereignty and international law. Senator Bam Aquino has argued that cases related to the alleged extrajudicial killings should be heard in Philippine courts, rather than an international tribunal. This sentiment reflects a broader debate about the appropriate forum for addressing allegations of human rights abuses and the balance between national jurisdiction and international oversight.

The ICC’s involvement stems from the Philippines’ withdrawal from the court in March 2019. However, the ICC maintains jurisdiction over crimes committed while the Philippines was a member, which includes the period covered by the current investigation. The court’s decision to proceed with the case despite the Philippines’ withdrawal underscores the principle of universal jurisdiction and the international community’s commitment to holding individuals accountable for the most serious crimes of concern to the international community.